Death Comes to Pemberley

A rare meeting of literary genius: P. D. James, long among the most admired mystery writers of our time, draws the characters of Jane Austen’s beloved novel Pride and Prejudice into a tale of murder and emotional mayhem.

It is 1803, six years since Elizabeth and Darcy embarked on their life together at Pemberley, Darcy’s magnificent estate.Their peaceful, orderly world seA rare meeting of literary genius: P. D. James, long among the most admired mystery writers of our time, draws the characters of Jane Austen’s beloved novel Pride and Prejudice into a tale of murder and emotional mayhem.

It is 1803, six years since Elizabeth and Darcy embarked on their life together at Pemberley, Darcy’s magnificent estate. Their peaceful, orderly world seems almost unassailable. Elizabeth has found her footing as the chatelaine of the great house. They have two fine sons, Fitzwilliam and Charles. Elizabeth’s sister Jane and her husband, Bingley, live nearby; her father visits often; there is optimistic talk about the prospects of marriage for Darcy’s sister Georgiana. And preparations are under way for their much-anticipated annual autumn ball.

Then, on the eve of the ball, the patrician idyll is shattered. A coach careens up the drive carrying Lydia, Elizabeth’s disgraced sister, who with her husband, the very dubious Wickham, has been banned from Pemberley. She stumbles out of the carriage, hysterical, shrieking that Wickham has been murdered. With shocking suddenness, Pemberley is plunged into a frightening mystery.

Inspired by a lifelong passion for Austen, P. D. James masterfully re-creates the world of Pride and Prejudice, electrifying it with the excitement and suspense of a brilliantly crafted crime story, as only she can write it....more

Hardcover, 291 pages

Published
December 6th 2011
by Alfred A. Knopf
(first published November 1st 2011)

Community Reviews

A hideous, plodding, ungraceful piece of mawkish fanfiction that succeeds neither as a mystery or as a pastiche of Austen's most beloved novel. Oy.

Almost from page one, there are embarassing lapses of craft and tone. None of the economy or vibrance of Austen appears in these pages and the so-called plot is built around a "mystery" that was so hamhanded that I'd sussed the perpetrator within the first 50 pages. But that's not the worst of it. Some of the greatest characters in world literature reA hideous, plodding, ungraceful piece of mawkish fanfiction that succeeds neither as a mystery or as a pastiche of Austen's most beloved novel. Oy.

Almost from page one, there are embarassing lapses of craft and tone. None of the economy or vibrance of Austen appears in these pages and the so-called plot is built around a "mystery" that was so hamhanded that I'd sussed the perpetrator within the first 50 pages. But that's not the worst of it. Some of the greatest characters in world literature reduced to the thinness of playing cards. Fancy-dress dialogue that humps along without import or impact. More than anything, this entire story has an air of workmanlike drudgery about it, as if a third of the way in James had realized she wasn't up to the task but soldiered through by force of duty. Apathy and sloppiness strangle this book a page at a time.

Any fiction that "expands" on an existing narrative must do heavy lifting (familiarizing fresh readers with the previous work, but also standing on its own merit). This book accomplishes neither. I cannot imagine WHAT possessed anyone to publish this outside of James successful track record as a crime novelist. If anything, that skill set should have been a deterrent. For some reasons of her own, James structures the entire experiment as a closed "country house" mystery with (essentially) a single location. As in the most inept mystery fiction, she treats the P&P characters as unchanging chess pieces sealed in aspic with a single defining character trait. No one here has a believable emotion or motivation. Unlike Austen, James presents a plot which is a flimsy, mechanical contrivance existing purely to generate tiffs and tizzies with no real weight or consequence to anyone. None of the pacing or movement or drama of an Austen novel is in evidence. And watching endless cooing and billing by the Darcys and the Bingleys had me reaching for the airsick bag often. THERE ARE NO STAKES. What lobotomized Jane Austen was P.D. James reading when this thing got cranked out? Where was the wit, bite, and wiliness of Austen's world?

I respect James as a mystery author, but this was appalling in most of its particulars: plot, diction, character, setting. For me the hardest thing to read were the incessant "remember when?" exposition nuggets by characters recounting many, many MAJOR events from Pride & Prejudice as if they were all recovering amnesiacs giving depositions in an imaginary courtroom. "Remember when she said to me... Remember when I asked you..." I can only assume the James felt like we might need a refresher course, so she has characters turn to each other and explain proposals, embarassments, arguments, scandal from P&P... as if everyone on the page has had a closed head injury in the intervening years. As if people reading THIS book wouldn't be familiar with the other greater novel's most critical scenes and lines. As if quoting Austen was the same thing as expanding upon her. As if Austen's characters are so wooden and static that they cannot manage to do anything that they have not already done 200 years ago for thir creator. As if "historicizing" Austen's characters didn't encumber some of English literature's most nimble creations with deadening, leaden weight.

And apparently James has no interest in the beloved characters AS characters as they neither act or speak like themselves (even when quoting their earlier dialogue), nor does she allow them to be changed by the (pointless/flaccid) events of this novel. The convoluted, digressive explanations for offpage actions in P&P derail this book repeatedly. James is so busy opining about events long past and unrelated that for long stretches she forgets that she's supposed to be, y'know, writing a book of her own. A simpering Elizabeth who now distrusts/dismisses Charlotte (Lucas) Collins on a whim and worried more about sick servants and social obligations than Wickham's invasion of her home? A Mr. Bennett who now sneaks off to hide from his wife's "flutterings and spasms" in the Pemberley library? A Darcy who traces his austerity to Oprah-ific childhood traumas and protects Wickham with little difficulty? Gack. Ick. This is in effect, a piece of inept P&P rhapsody which treats the main characters of its source material as the very boring, bourgeois blockheads they skewered so ruthlessly in Austen's novel. Which begs the question: if James cannot write the characters, if she had no sense of the subtlety or a feel for emotional plotting, why bother to write this book? Again, shades of the feeblest fanfiction by the most uncritical amateur... Death by blundering timidity. Ugh.

What can you expect if you DO read this hash? No characterization to speak of. Swampy stretches of pointless research ladeled in as if to fill wordcount requirements. A slim, idiotic "mystery" that telegraphs its solution from around page 45. Lots of suspiciously procedural mystery writing in "ye olde" Regency-speak. Dangling plot threads and unshocking "surprises" by the barrel. Long, long passages of obligatory backstory delivered in massive unparagraphed chunks as if, by parroting some of Austen's diction, James might swipe some of the spark and effervescence. Not hardly. Ugh. Endless, ridiculous requotings of "good bits" from Austen's writing lifted DIRECTLY from the six major novels that jarred every time I stumbled over them.

Apparently, James just liked certain phrases so darned much she decided to plunk them in wholesale and the effect is uncomfortably awkward. These regurgitations resonate not as loving homage but as failure of imagination and craft. To take one example, Elizabeth can apparently ONLY be described as having "fine eyes." Wickham must always be tagged with the phrase "quite wild." And Pemberly is "polluted" THREE times in this book, and Lady Catherine doesn't even show up to use her own words. And a good thing, if the clunky, leaden Darcy and Elizabeth here are any indication, any of Austen's creations who don't turn up for the "scandalous" proceedings got off lightly. And don't get me started on the weird easter eggs giving "clever" shout-outs to other Austen characters (Harriet Smith, Anne Elliot). Again, in what universe does any of this posturing resemble Austen or even a competent piece of fiction? James knows better. Her publishers know better. Her readers should know better. Are people so bamboozled by the spectre of "great literature" and an éminence grise that they'll swallow this kind of muck uncritically?

This entire book felt feeble and awkward and a little embarassing. If you are an Austen fan you'll loathe it; if you are a mystery fan you'll find it juvenile and obvious; if you're an educated reader you'll feel insulted and bored. Neither fish nor fowl, the book exists as a kind of a trout with wings (or sparrow with gills) expiring painfully and repetitively for 280 unwitty pages. About halfway through I realized that this is EXACTLY the kind of Austen pastiche enjoyed by people who don't actually read Austen, and who believe that all period fiction just needs some velvet and horses and servants to thrill us to our middlebrow Masterpiece Theatre marrows. When I'd finished, I tried to imagine the intended audience... Best I could come up with: elderly suburban nonreaders who love telly but can't follow any story without coaching from well-meaning relatives and a repeated peeks at the TV Guide blurb.

CarolThank you for the review. I think I am going to give it away. I too think I know who the perpetrator is bro early in the book, I have found the book hThank you for the review. I think I am going to give it away. I too think I know who the perpetrator is bro early in the book, I have found the book hard going and often find my mind drifting to more exciting things like, should I get up and watch the grass grow, I had been looking forward to this book but now it is time to leave it and move on,...more
Dec 19, 2014 02:53PM

Oh dear. What were PD James, her agent and her publisher thinking? And more to the point, what was I thinking, deciding to actually spend money on this book?

All I can say is that it seemed like a good idea at the time. I am in what I presume to be the target demographic for this novel: female, passionate about Jane Austen's novels, a long-time reader of crime fiction and a fan of PD James to boot. Indeed, if James' name had not been on the cover, this is a book I would not have contemplated reaOh dear. What were PD James, her agent and her publisher thinking? And more to the point, what was I thinking, deciding to actually spend money on this book?

All I can say is that it seemed like a good idea at the time. I am in what I presume to be the target demographic for this novel: female, passionate about Jane Austen's novels, a long-time reader of crime fiction and a fan of PD James to boot. Indeed, if James' name had not been on the cover, this is a book I would not have contemplated reading, for while I love Austen, I have an instinctive prejudice against the Austen prequel-sequel-continuation-fanfic industry. PD James, I thought, could make this work. She didn't. So what seemed like a good idea turned into a very bad idea indeed.

Where to start? I'll try to come up with something positive to say about the book first. Well .... from time to time, when some of the book's more egregious flaws weren't overwhelming me, the fact that James can write clear and elegant prose actually came through. There are bits of witty dialogue and the occasional worthwhile section of descriptive language. Hmmm.... that's about it for the positives.

As for the negatives, the problem will be to limit myself to just a few of the things I disliked most. I'll start with the disastrous lack of characterisation and the tedious plot. The re-booted Austen characters - Darcy, Elizabeth, Jane, Bingley, Wickham and so on - are flat and diminished. All of the life Austen breathed into them has been sucked out. James' own characters are scarcely more interesting. The plot is dull and for a mystery it's not very mysterious. Sure, there's a dead body, but there's remarkably little detecting and the resolution - which arises from a deus ex machina(view spoiler)[deathbed confession (hide spoiler)] falls as flat as the characterisation.

What else? Well, there are some extremely annoying "As you know, Bob" information dumps which made my eyes roll clear to the back of my head. Equally annoying (although I admit it made both me and my husband hoot with laughter) was a section in which Darcy foreshadows changes to the jury system in criminal trials and the introduction of appeals from jury verdicts. I seem to recall another bit of foreshadowing: something about how America was going to become a great nation in which human rights would be protected. (I'm hazy on the details here. That bit came at a point when I was pretty desperate to finish the book). Another thing I hated was the introduction of characters from other Austen novels whose names are randomly woven into the narrative, for what purpose I have no idea. It was unnecessary, clumsy and frankly laughable. I could write a lot more about the problems I have with the novel, but I'll leave that to others. If I keep going I might not know when to stop.

I know from my long experience of reading James' novels that she is a writer of competent police procedurals. But something went very wrong with this experiment. Readers who want to read a Pride and Prejudice continuation will want to at least recognise the characters they know and love. They won't find them in this novel. Readers who want to read a mystery novel will want a puzzle to solve. Their expectations won't be met either.

Admittedly, when I started reading this novel I wasn't convinced that it would appeal to me. That was my prejudice against Austen fanfic speaking. I thought James could be the writer who would lead me to overcome that prejudice - or that at the very least I would get to read an entertaining piece of crime fiction - but that was not to be. This book is a big fail in all departments, only made bearable by the fact that it was a buddy read with my friends Jemidar and Jeannette.

The lesson I have learned from the experience? My aversion to Austen fan fiction is soundly based. If I want to read about Elizabeth and Darcy, I'll re-read Pride and Prejudice. Austen's characters belong in her novels and in my imagination. I really don't want to see them anywhere else.

I thought about giving this book two stars, but I can't. Maybe it deserves 1-1/2 stars for good grammar, well-constructed sentences and no obvious typos. I can't rate it any more highly than that.

ETA: I've just discovered that this book was positively reviewed in The New York Times. I don't agree with the reviewer's assessment, but different perspectives are always worth reading. ["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>...more

I considered mounting a passionate defense in favor of this lovingly-rendered tribute to Jane Austen, but then I decided I couldn't care less what the naysayers think. If you pick up this gentle whodunit expecting the sartorial sleuthing of Commander Adam Dalgliesh, you will be disappointed. If you read this looking for the ghost of Jane Austen, you will catch but a glimpse of her delicate frame. Although the point of fan-fiction escapes me entirely (I can't help but think of tribute bands; I haI considered mounting a passionate defense in favor of this lovingly-rendered tribute to Jane Austen, but then I decided I couldn't care less what the naysayers think. If you pick up this gentle whodunit expecting the sartorial sleuthing of Commander Adam Dalgliesh, you will be disappointed. If you read this looking for the ghost of Jane Austen, you will catch but a glimpse of her delicate frame. Although the point of fan-fiction escapes me entirely (I can't help but think of tribute bands; I have no more desire to explore fan-fiction than I would to see my approaching-middle-age cohorts belt out Whitesnake's greatest hits), Death Comes to Pemberley reads like a tender squeeze of affection from one national literary treasure to another.

If you do sink into this literary treat, know that your Jane ear will delight in the recaptured cadence of her prose and that you will be enchanted by the sense and sensibilities of Regency Britain. You will encounter familiar names and faces from across the Austen oeuvre; you will be moved by James's piquant touches of the political and social realities of the era.

If you aren't able to let go and enjoy Death Comes to Pemberley within its opening pages, put it down, walk away and spend your time reading something better suited to your expectations.

P.D. James isn't so many years from meeting Jane in that Great Bibliotheque in the Sky. I can just see these two outrageously smart, sublime writers sharing a pot of tea and chatting about their writing lives. To curl up in a damask wing chair before a merry fire, listening to Jane and Phyllis plotting out a meeting between Adam Dalgliesh and Fitzwilliam Darcy is my vision of heaven....more

AnnExactly, anyone who reads the work of Jane Austen should be able to tell that she did not take herself so seriously and in fact, it quite amused her tExactly, anyone who reads the work of Jane Austen should be able to tell that she did not take herself so seriously and in fact, it quite amused her to poke fun at people who were self-righteous and took themselves seriously. She would definitely get a kick out of the journeys other writers have given to her most famous heroes and heroines. Because it's all in good fun....more
Jun 22, 2013 10:25AM

AlejandroEven taking that here is one of her character who made the detective work, there is also a series of Jane Austen herself doing the investigative workEven taking that here is one of her character who made the detective work, there is also a series of Jane Austen herself doing the investigative work :D And it's one of the wonderful things about Jane Austen, that she became as popular as her own books if not more. :D...more
Jun 22, 2013 05:43PM

There were good and bad things about this book. It gave more nuanced portraits of some of the characters, notably Darcy but also some minor characters. It invites the reader to think a little differently about Jane Austen's classic novel.

However, the use of Austen's source material, though meant as an affectionate tribute, is wooden, often heavy-handed and often overdone. Some characters are dealt with unsatisfactorily. Mary ends up in a situation which for her is suitable (in fact I had thoughThere were good and bad things about this book. It gave more nuanced portraits of some of the characters, notably Darcy but also some minor characters. It invites the reader to think a little differently about Jane Austen's classic novel.

However, the use of Austen's source material, though meant as an affectionate tribute, is wooden, often heavy-handed and often overdone. Some characters are dealt with unsatisfactorily. Mary ends up in a situation which for her is suitable (in fact I had thought of a similar fate for her long before reading this). But Kitty is scarcely mentioned, is portrayed in a way that doesn't jive with Austen's version of her, and is relegated to the shadows. Mrs. Bennet, who could have provided some gorgeous comic relief, is barely heard from. Lady Catherine, suitably housebroken, barely barks at all. Finally, Georgiana's fate, while happy, seems engineered in a rather facile way and perplexes me also.

I expect I am not alone in having bought this book because I was attracted by the idea of a murder mystery set in Pemberley. I'd fondly imagined that Elizabeth Darcy (née Bennett) would be a witty and perceptive detective, and that P. D. James would successfully channel Jane Austen's muse. I was to be disappointed on both counts. The plot is dull but complex, the writing is mostly dull (and no more than occasionally a pale shadow of Jane Austen's) , worst of all, Elizabeth herself is dull and paI expect I am not alone in having bought this book because I was attracted by the idea of a murder mystery set in Pemberley. I'd fondly imagined that Elizabeth Darcy (née Bennett) would be a witty and perceptive detective, and that P. D. James would successfully channel Jane Austen's muse. I was to be disappointed on both counts. The plot is dull but complex, the writing is mostly dull (and no more than occasionally a pale shadow of Jane Austen's) , worst of all, Elizabeth herself is dull and passive. It's hard to escape the conclusion that this novel has been written to order, from a publisher's concept, to give an author whose powers are failing a more comfortable retirement. It is certainly very far from being the labour of love of a gifted writer, who knows Pride and Prejudice intimately, that one might have hoped for. Walk-on roles for characters from some of Jane Austen's other novels, while they may raise a smile, only serve to emphasise how poor the characterisation actually is. If one started with a hackneyed Victorian melodrama about a poor servant girl undone by a heartless aristocrat, and attempted to transplant it half a century back in time without worrying too much about period detail, changed some character names, and interpolated a few passages linking back to well-loved Jane Austen novels you would end up with something very close to this book. Don't buy it, or bother to read it....more

This is perhaps the worst of all the Pride and Prejudice sequels and prequels. Over the years I've read some outlandish stuff-Elizabeth and Darcy enjoying a quickie in the morning room, an insane woman haunting Pemberley and making Darcy unfit for Miss Eliza-and other such rubbish. But nowhere else did they seem so dull and lifeless, so devoid of charm and spark. Be forewarned, the death referred to in the title is really that of Elizabeth Bennett which is simply unforgivable.

KimMandy wrote: "Please hide your review if it contains spoilers- I was dismayed to see your last sentence, as I haven't read it yet!!"

Don't worry Mandy,Mandy wrote: "Please hide your review if it contains spoilers- I was dismayed to see your last sentence, as I haven't read it yet!!"

Don't worry Mandy, it's not a spoiler. It's a comment on the writing and what it does to the character Austen created....more
Aug 15, 2012 11:44PM

Gary the BookwormSharon wrote: "I'm worried for Dear P.D. James. She seems to be going down in flames. How dare her editors lie to us and to HER?! Reminds us to changeSharon wrote: "I'm worried for Dear P.D. James. She seems to be going down in flames. How dare her editors lie to us and to HER?! Reminds us to change pen name or quit while still on top of our game. Poor Darling."

I agree. It borders on elder abuse...I loved the preface but by the second chapter, I was shocked and appalled!...more
Mar 22, 2013 03:02PM

Where I got the book: my local library. Unable to finish for the reasons cited below: made it to page 80.

It hurts to write this review. I LOVE PD James. Her subtlety, her edginess, the sheer intelligence of her prose, the nuances of her characters...I could go on. And NONE of this is to be found within the pages of Death Comes to Pemberley. I'm sure I wasn't the only fan to get all excited about the idea of PD James doing Pride and Prejudice; what insights, what delicate twists of humor, what liWhere I got the book: my local library. Unable to finish for the reasons cited below: made it to page 80.

It hurts to write this review. I LOVE PD James. Her subtlety, her edginess, the sheer intelligence of her prose, the nuances of her characters...I could go on. And NONE of this is to be found within the pages of Death Comes to Pemberley. I'm sure I wasn't the only fan to get all excited about the idea of PD James doing Pride and Prejudice; what insights, what delicate twists of humor, what light would she shed on Jane Austen's world?

So I feel cheated. I feel like the crime that's been committed here is not within the pages, but is against the reader who expected a PD James novel and got--yes, I've got to say it--SOPHOMORIC DRIVEL.

Chunks of turgid prose. Inane dialogue that appears to have come straight from the pages of a 1950s girls' magazine. A cringeworthy prologue that pretty much recounts the plot of P&P in what-I-read-over-the-summer-holidays essay style. Stiff, stilted, wooden characters from a Pride & Prejudice puppet show.

Awful.Awful.Awful.

And published by Alfred A. Knopf, a publishing house that's even older than James (OH DAMN I WASN'T GOING TO MENTION HER AGE BUT. 92.) Now owned (Knopf, not James, although that's also debatable) by Random House. Who also recently gave us Fifty Shades of Grey. I have listened to the traditional publishing world SCREAMING that they are the last bastion of quality in publishing and that all the newcomers on the scene don't give a crap about good literature. And then they do this.

I'm not going to start questioning why James is writing fan fiction in the style of a 20-year-old novice. I really don't care. But I care a whole lot that agents, editors, publishing committees and executives were more interested in the fact that 98% of James fans would read this book and that it was bound to sell well than in whether or not IT DESERVED TO SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY.

Some years after Pride and Prejudice, Lydia Wickham (nee Bennet) stumbles through the front door of Pemberley in hysterics. There were gunshots in the woods, and she's sure her husband has been murdered. Darcy and some of the other men go out in search, and find (view spoiler)[Mr. Wickham crouched over Denny's body. He is covered in blood and, upon seeing them, says he killed his friend. (hide spoiler)] Darcy summons the magistrate and then spends the entire rest of the novel thinking anachronisSome years after Pride and Prejudice, Lydia Wickham (nee Bennet) stumbles through the front door of Pemberley in hysterics. There were gunshots in the woods, and she's sure her husband has been murdered. Darcy and some of the other men go out in search, and find (view spoiler)[Mr. Wickham crouched over Denny's body. He is covered in blood and, upon seeing them, says he killed his friend. (hide spoiler)] Darcy summons the magistrate and then spends the entire rest of the novel thinking anachronistic thoughts and doing absolutely nothing related to the murder investigation. In fact, there really isn't a murder investigation; the most the characters do in regards to the murder is sit around the fire talking about whether or not the alleged murderer has the mindset possible to do the deed. No evidence turns up, nor do the characters make any attempt to find any. The full story of the murder is randomly turned up in a deathbed confession, and then another character equally randomly confesses the rest of the plot.

It's a very odd book. Usually a murder mystery involves a long period of finding out clues, or talking to witnesses, or figuring out the motives--and instead the characters just go over the same three facts ad nauseum. For example: we see the discovery of the body through Mr. Darcy's eyes, and then he relives the discovery a few times, and then he recounts the discovery several times to various law enforcement personnel. His story and view of the facts never change, so there's no point to going over it all again almost word-for-word.

It's no good as historical fiction, because although James has clearly done some research into the period (which she infodumps randomly; for example, apropos of nothing, Darcy soapboxes about the need for an appeals court) she doesn't seem to get the underpinnings of Regency society. The characters are worried that they might upset the police by moving the body--even though they would have no reason to expect an autopsy, and the police of the time were a distrustred force of ill-trained, ill-paid, low class dudes who barely existed yet. And even a century later the police wouldn't be going in the front door, let alone questioning rich gentlemen about their alibis in the parlor!

And it doesn't work as a continuation of Pride and Prejudice, either. The spirit and wit of Austen is completely missing, but then I expected that. But the characters are all wrong as well! Elizabeth is a quiet, maternal figure in the background, who has about three scenes total. She and Mr.Darcy hardly speak to each other, except to utter platitudes about how happy they are to have children or to rehash old lines from P&P. Colonel Fitzwilliam gets a complete character assassination--far from the wry, practical man who bantered with Lizzy, here he's a prig who despises her. It doesn't ring true.

Death Comes to Pemberley just doesn't satisfy on any level. If you're looking for murder mysteries set in the Regency period, I suggest the Julian Kestral series by Kate Ross instead.

(The review I used to have up, before I read the book, was "Ooh, I hope Wickham's been murdered! That child-molesting, predatory lying scumbag.")["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>...more

When I won an advance copy of this book on Goodreads I was thrilled. Perhaps I approached the story with expectations too high. I wanted so much to like it, but the more I read the more disappointed I became. The prose is very well-written and somewhat in the Austen manner, but without the subtle wit.

What I found tiresome was the story-telling. The first word of dialogue is not spoken for many, many pages and much of the dialogue is actually a series of lengthy monologues that sound more like nWhen I won an advance copy of this book on Goodreads I was thrilled. Perhaps I approached the story with expectations too high. I wanted so much to like it, but the more I read the more disappointed I became. The prose is very well-written and somewhat in the Austen manner, but without the subtle wit.

What I found tiresome was the story-telling. The first word of dialogue is not spoken for many, many pages and much of the dialogue is actually a series of lengthy monologues that sound more like narrative. Passages of action are often repeated almost word for word when one character tells another what happened or testimony is recounted at the inquest and trial. There seemed to be so little at stake and no one except the police made any effort to sort out the mystery. In the end it only comes to light when the perpetrator confesses. The last fifty pages are characters explanations of how the murder came about and why they went to such lengths to cover it up.

I struggled through to the end hoping it would get better, but it never did. I hate to write a bad review, but with the publisher charging $25 Cdn for this book, I wanted to warn potential buyers. ...more

Heard about this book on NPR today. Sounds like a great read--Jane Austen and a murder mystery all wrapped up in one!

Ok, now it's several months later and I've had the opportunity to read the book. It was tolerable, I suppose, for a read at the beach. But I admit it failed to live up to the expectations of an Austen novel or a good murder mystery. As for striving to achieve the heights of Austen, I feel James spent too much time apologizing for the actions of the characters in P&P. I think wHeard about this book on NPR today. Sounds like a great read--Jane Austen and a murder mystery all wrapped up in one!

Ok, now it's several months later and I've had the opportunity to read the book. It was tolerable, I suppose, for a read at the beach. But I admit it failed to live up to the expectations of an Austen novel or a good murder mystery. As for striving to achieve the heights of Austen, I feel James spent too much time apologizing for the actions of the characters in P&P. I think we can understand their motivations well enough, or at least accept their imperfections, such that we don't require further explanations. And as for the mystery, I was disappointed at the lack of active mystery solving undertaken by the characters. The truth eventually unfolds, due to the late presentation of evidence from individuals involved, but no one seemed interested in seeking out the truth. I would have liked to see Darcy dig deep to find his inner Sherlock Holmes and be the one to solve the mystery. ...more

I'm really torn about this book. One of my favorite mystery writers meets one of my favorite stories; it's gotta be good, right? And it is good. But it's not great, and I was hoping for great.

I shy away from a lot of the Pride and Prejudice follow ons--fan fiction legitimized by a publisher, and sometimes not nearly as good as amateur fan fiction. But this I was eager to read. And I will say, it held my interest. James does a good job of capturing the spirit and even language of Austen, not perI'm really torn about this book. One of my favorite mystery writers meets one of my favorite stories; it's gotta be good, right? And it is good. But it's not great, and I was hoping for great.

I shy away from a lot of the Pride and Prejudice follow ons--fan fiction legitimized by a publisher, and sometimes not nearly as good as amateur fan fiction. But this I was eager to read. And I will say, it held my interest. James does a good job of capturing the spirit and even language of Austen, not perfectly, but definitely nothing to cringe at.

But there were missteps, in my opinion. First, too much time and ink was spent essentially retelling the story of Pride and Prejudice and not enough time building on it. There were long passages throughout the book that just recapped the original story. Granted, not every one of James' readers will have read P&P, but I'd venture most of us will have. That's why we picked this up to begin with. Trust your readers a bit. And if they haven't read it, give them an excuse to, instead of just giving them a recap so they don't have to.

Unfortunately, retelling the original was not the only time James strayed from the "show, don't tell" rule. There was also a lot of exposition done through long monologues by different characters. Indeed, the mystery itself was weak and not very satisfying--which pains me to say because this is P. D. James after all.

Finally, and perhaps most disappointing of all, there simply wasn't enough interaction between Elizabeth and Darcy. They seemed to be each pursuing different activities through most of the book. Let's face it, part of the joy of returning to them post P&P is getting back to the delicious sexual tension that Austen crafted. I wanted them to be less intellect and more passion. But here again it was told, not shown.

Maybe I expected too much; maybe it's an impossible task to try to capture characters who are in many was so deeply personal to their fans. This was James' vision, not mine. Still, I did enjoy the book. So if you're an Austen fan or a P. D. James fan, don't miss it. ...more

It is a truth universally acknowledged that a good writer attempting to emulate a great writer will invariably fail. Even if that good writer is considered to be the doyenne of her genre, readers seeking the focused wit and social observation of the original creator will close her book frustrated, especially if many reviewers extoll the sequel's virtues as entertainment and fitting homage.

A few brief passages sparkle with the reflected brilliance of Austen and most of them have been extensivelyIt is a truth universally acknowledged that a good writer attempting to emulate a great writer will invariably fail. Even if that good writer is considered to be the doyenne of her genre, readers seeking the focused wit and social observation of the original creator will close her book frustrated, especially if many reviewers extoll the sequel's virtues as entertainment and fitting homage.

A few brief passages sparkle with the reflected brilliance of Austen and most of them have been extensively quoted in reviews. If you are looking for the good lines, read those and forget the book. If however, you wish to be entertained for several hours, James, crafts an enjoyable if predictable mystery. Her style is far more descriptive of the environment of Pemberley and unlike Austen, she neglects to reveal character through dialogue and interaction, but relies solely on reflection. Most disappointingly, perhaps because of her own preferences for central male characters, James exerts virtually all of her energy on expanding on Mr. Darcy's character instead of allowing Elizabeth to remain front and center. Her motherly Elizabeth bears no resemblance to the intelligent and appealingly flawed center of Pride and Prejudice. It's as if James believes that marriage and motherhood are truly the end of the line for women and the assumption of these roles consign them forever banal characterizations as Madonnas (Elizabeth, Jane) or Medusas (Lady Catherine, Mrs. Bennet, Lydia).

Oh Lord, as Lydia might say. Where to begin? A big deal was made about this in Austenland because an "established author" was writing a P&P sequel. Perhaps that is something that should never be repeated because this was horrifying. Here is why:

1.) Protracted portions of the novel are spent summarizing what happened in P&P. I seriously can't imagine that any but a tiny fraction of the realistic audience for this book isn't familiar enough with the story for this to be unnecessary. Plus iOh Lord, as Lydia might say. Where to begin? A big deal was made about this in Austenland because an "established author" was writing a P&P sequel. Perhaps that is something that should never be repeated because this was horrifying. Here is why:

1.) Protracted portions of the novel are spent summarizing what happened in P&P. I seriously can't imagine that any but a tiny fraction of the realistic audience for this book isn't familiar enough with the story for this to be unnecessary. Plus it is REALLY ANNOYING to the large fraction who are.

2.) The author makes a few changes to Austen canon which in itself is not a problem if done well and for a reasonable purpose. BUT. Two of these changes (what "ends up happening" to Mary and Kitty) are merely inexplicable, because Mary and Kitty do not figure in the plot at all, so really, why bother? And the other is basically unforgivable. In P&P Darcy's mother dies when Georgiana is very young and then his father dies several years later. This order of events is significant in shaping the characters of Darcy, Wickham and Georgiana who then commit the acts which drive the plot. If the parental death order were reversed, as James has it, their characters may have developed very differently and so would everything else! WTF. Can you really imagine Lady Anne continuing to spoil her husband's pet George Wickham even after his death? James never deals with the implications of this at all.

3.) How in the hell can you have a P&P sequel in which Elizabeth and Darcy barely have a single conversation? I mean, really! Isn't that the entire point of P&P sequels?

4.) (a) If I wanted a primer on the intricacies of Regency-era law this is not the first medium I would turn to. Yet that is what readers of this will get. However (b) the device of explaining and analyzing all of that history here, while it could be interesting, (c) is not and (d) makes no sense because the person who is purportedly ignorant about so much of the procedure, Darcy, is a magistrate and supposedly a very intelligent, well-read, well-informed person so why would he constantly need everything explained to him? WHY?

5.) Just from a general writing perspective: way too much telling, not at all enough showing.

6.) The mystery ends up being totally disappointing. Half of it is telegraphed from the beginning and the other half is relatively un-deducible. Also, the only thing driving me to finish this was my hope that one of the central P&P characters besides the obvious had committed some sort of unexpected dastardly deed. BUT NO.

7.) The best comic characters (Mrs. Bennet, Lady Catherine, Mr. Collins) make appearances only by letter.

Fortunately it only took me a day and a half to read this so I spent almost as long composing this rant as I did cringing through the book. I can't say that I recommend this to anyone but it would be nice if someone else I know would read it so I can complain about it cathartically. ...more

JillI agree. The book was total rubbish. All Mr Bennet did was sit in the library and never spoke to Elizabeth. What the heck was his purpose in the bookI agree. The book was total rubbish. All Mr Bennet did was sit in the library and never spoke to Elizabeth. What the heck was his purpose in the book if that was all he did....more
Feb 06, 2012 09:46AM

I owe an apology to the shade of Jane Austen for involving herbeloved Elizabeth in the trauma of a murder investigation,especially as in the final chapter of Mansfield Park Miss Austen madeher views quite plain; 'Let other pens dwell on the guilt and misery.I quit such odious subjects as soon as i can, impatient to restore everybody not greatly in fault themselves to tolerable comfort, and to have done with all the rest.' No doubt she would have replied to my apology by saying, hadAuthors note:

I owe an apology to the shade of Jane Austen for involving herbeloved Elizabeth in the trauma of a murder investigation,especially as in the final chapter of Mansfield Park Miss Austen madeher views quite plain; 'Let other pens dwell on the guilt and misery.I quit such odious subjects as soon as i can, impatient to restore everybody not greatly in fault themselves to tolerable comfort, and to have done with all the rest.' No doubt she would have replied to my apology by saying, had she wished to dwell on such odious subjects, she would have written this story herself, and done better.

P.D James 2011

I love love love this.Makes me want to read it even more.

Unfortunatley, as much as i wanted to love this, it was a little bit too menacing for me. I felt there wasn't enough of the quirky Humorous feeling i loved about pride and prejudice....more

How an author takes several interesting ingredients--a murder mystery and the Pride and Prejudice setting and characters--and manages to stir them together and bake them into a stiff, boring, humorless lump of underdone pumpernickel bread, is a mystery that, sadly, will remain forever unanswered.

I keep thinking of the title to an old Ogden Nash poem, "Will You Have Your Tedium Rare or Medium?"

I feel like I'm being generous and kind-hearted with a two star rating. Seriously, don't bother.

QNPoohBearTadiana wrote: "Well, I watched the whole thing. There were parts I enjoyed, but I could not get over how miscast Elizabeth was. They had 37 y.o. AnnaTadiana wrote: "Well, I watched the whole thing. There were parts I enjoyed, but I could not get over how miscast Elizabeth was. They had 37 y.o. Anna Maxwell Martin playing 27 y.o. Elizabeth, and I could never su..."

Agreed. Anna Maxwell Martin is my age and I know I can pass for a decade younger but she can't. Plus Lizzie is supposed to be dark with fine, eyes. Plus Elizabeth is not tall. Georgiana, who is 16 and still growing, is about "Miss Elizabeth Bennet's height, or maybe taller." I agree about Lydia though she's too petite. Lydia is the tallest of all the sisters. I forgive that because her acting was excellent and the character spot on.

TadianaI agree; a lot of actresses can pass for 10 years younger, but AMM isn't one of them. She's a marvelous actress, but she just wasn't right for this paI agree; a lot of actresses can pass for 10 years younger, but AMM isn't one of them. She's a marvelous actress, but she just wasn't right for this part at all. The eyes as well, as you point out. I forgot about Lydia's height, but that's a point that I'm more negotiable on....more
Dec 02, 2014 02:38PM

I consider it more than a bit perplexing when an author begins their book with an apology. In this case, it is to author Jane Austen for using her characters. Since Death Comes to Pemberley is a sequel to Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, it is like apologizing for snow being cold. If you are going to write a sequel to a classic of world literature, it is, what it is. Don’t apologize for it. It really puts me off my reading game from the get go.

Okay, I got that off my chest, so now on to more pleasaI consider it more than a bit perplexing when an author begins their book with an apology. In this case, it is to author Jane Austen for using her characters. Since Death Comes to Pemberley is a sequel to Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, it is like apologizing for snow being cold. If you are going to write a sequel to a classic of world literature, it is, what it is. Don’t apologize for it. It really puts me off my reading game from the get go.

Okay, I got that off my chest, so now on to more pleasant topics – the fact that the venerable mystery writer P. D. James has taken up her pen inspired by my, and her, favorite author and whipped up a murder mystery for me do devour is delightful. What Janeite in their right mind is not salivating at the thought of an Austen sequel written by such an acclaimed and exalted author? Just the thought of Austen and mystery in one sentence pushes me into the giddy zone. To say that my “wishes and hopes might be fixed” in anticipation is an understatement.

It is six years since the happy day on which Mrs. Bennet got rid of her two most deserving daughters in marriage: Jane to Charles Bingley and Elizabeth to Fitzwilliam Darcy. Both sisters and their husbands are at Pemberley, the palatial country estate of the Darcys in Derbyshire, whose grandeur is only equal to the ten thousand a year that it generates for its previously haughty master and decidedly opinionated mistress. Elizabeth has settled in as chatelaine to a large estate and mother to two young sons. Life is orderly and good at Pemberley, as long as one stays out of the haunted woodland.

Darcy’s younger, and still unmarried, sister Georgiana is also in residence being courted by two beaux: her cousin Colonel Fitzwilliam, and the young, ambitious, but dishy attorney, Henry Alveston. All have gathered for Lady Anne’s ball, an annual event in honor of Mr. Darcy’s deceased mother’s birthday. Many county families will be in attendance. On the eve of the grand event Mrs. Reynolds the housekeeper and the staff are busy preparing for the large formal gathering while the family dine and later meet in the music room. It is a windy, moonlit night, but Colonel Fitzwilliam takes his leave for his nightly exercise, a ride along the river. Later, many have said their goodnights and departed when Darcy is surprised by the sight of a carriage careening at full speed down the woodland road to Pemberley. The coach abruptly arrives depositing a frantic Lydia Wickham, Elizabeth’s unruly younger sister on the doorstep. She is hysterical, shrieking, “Wickham’s dead. Denny has shot him!”

The Wickhams had been traveling to Pemberley with friend Captain Denny by carriage. Even though Mr. Wickham would never be admitted to Pemberley because of his past indiscretion with Georgiana, Lydia, uninvited, had still planned to crash the party. Wickham and Denny had quarreled while traveling through the woodland, departed from the carriage, and gun shots heard soon after. Off into the haunted woods go the search party of Darcy, Alveston and Col. Fitzwilliam to discover a body in the woodland that Lydia is certain is her husband.

And now the glade was before them. Passing slowly, almost in awe, between two of the slender trunks, they stood as if physically rooted, speechless with horror. Before them, it stark colours a brutal contrast to the muted light, was a tableau of death. No one spoke. They moved slowly forward as one, all three holding their lanterns high; their strong beams, outshining the gentle radiance of the moon, intensified the bright red of the officer’s tunic and the ghastly blood-smeared face and mad glaring eyes turned toward them. p. 65

A murder in the haunted woodland. The investigation begins. The body is removed to Pemberley. Mr. Darcy notifies the local magistrate, Sir Selwyn Hardcastle, who arrives to conduct the inquiries. Darcy, Elizabeth, Jane and Bingley are all distraught by the shocking death. The staff is terrified that the curse of the Darcys continues in the haunted woodland. Lydia is hysterical. Lady Anne’s ball is canceled. The official inquest begins. Why did Colonel Fitzwilliam leave Pemberley to ride in terrible weather so late at night? What is the secret behind the Bidwell family who lives in the woodland cottage where Darcy’s great-grandfather committed suicide? Who, or what, is the shrouded figure who haunts the woodland? What is the motive for murder?

We are happily reunited with many of the characters from the beloved original novel and deposited at Pemberley, quite possibly the pinnacle of the Janeite world. Real comfort food for Austen fans. The first twenty page of the prologue recap the plot and details in Pride and Prejudice. Was this for the benefit of her mystery readers who have not read P&P? If so, the same effect could have been achieved by working it into the narrative in a more creative way. James continues building the mystery slowly by adding in elements of the haunted woodland, the curse, and the ghostly figures reminiscent of a Grimm’s fairytale. The plot ponders along with occasional bits of excitement from that evergreen drama queen, Lydia Wickham, nee Bennet, whose character she hits spot on. Another character who she develops interestingly is Colonel Fitzwilliam. He was the second son of an earl in Pride and Prejudice, and we all know that second sons must make their own way in the world. He chose the army. His life changes drastically, and his personality, when his brother dies and he becomes heir to a grand estate. He courts Georgiana, but don’t look for much romance in this novel. It is a mystery and her romantic triangle is second fiddle to the murder investigation. Darcy and Elizabeth are, well, an old married couple and not as interesting as the proud and prejudiced characters that Jane Austen presented. I missed their witty banter.

For Austen fans this will be an enjoyable, is somewhat ponderous, read if you overlook some of the annoying errors in continuity, and for mystery enthusiasts, James does spin a clever tale with a surprise ending that comes out of nowhere. Combined, the Austen and mystery elements do not play out to their potential. None-the-less, it is still an interesting read that has wrangled its way up the bestseller lists. That is an incredible achievement and great proof that the Austen brand continues to grow.

This book seems to be about as divisive as abortion with some reviewers seeing it as a crime against humanity and others defending a woman's right to choose - in this case, a 90 year old's right to choose to have a blast with one of her favourite writers.Two stars might seem to put me firmly in the pro-life camp, but two stars is OK. It was OK. I expected a refreshing swill round the mouth, a palate-cleanser for between the heavy tomes. What I got was leaden in places; the glaringly obvious deviThis book seems to be about as divisive as abortion with some reviewers seeing it as a crime against humanity and others defending a woman's right to choose - in this case, a 90 year old's right to choose to have a blast with one of her favourite writers.Two stars might seem to put me firmly in the pro-life camp, but two stars is OK. It was OK. I expected a refreshing swill round the mouth, a palate-cleanser for between the heavy tomes. What I got was leaden in places; the glaringly obvious devices to get the exposition out of the way - "Tell me again how you met him...." but there were some fun moments too, like how characters from other Austen novels were recruited into the story. The story, yes, well, all in all it dragged a bit, and the solution was convoluted. But it served its purpose: I'm ready to go back to the real MacKay....more

Recommends it for: insomniacs, people who don't really like themselves

I have never had any interest in the Jane Austen spin-off industry. Never understood why all those writers couldn’t come up with their own damn characters and leave Austen’s beloved creations alone. But when PD James jumped on the bandwagon, I thought, well, okay, there’s a proven good writer and I buckled. Too bad. Now I know that PD James possesses neither wit nor humor. Not that I ever would have condemned her for lacking such traits. I always held her in high esteem--Devices and Desires is oI have never had any interest in the Jane Austen spin-off industry. Never understood why all those writers couldn’t come up with their own damn characters and leave Austen’s beloved creations alone. But when PD James jumped on the bandwagon, I thought, well, okay, there’s a proven good writer and I buckled. Too bad. Now I know that PD James possesses neither wit nor humor. Not that I ever would have condemned her for lacking such traits. I always held her in high esteem--Devices and Desires is one of my all time favorite reading experiences. But, once borrowed, Jane Austen’s characters deserve to be handled with the same wit and humor they were accustomed to, and here PD James miserably fails them all.

At first, I enjoyed the reintroduction of Darcy, Elizabeth, Colonel Fitzwilliam. Just the names alone took me back to my first reading of Pride and Prejudice (and better yet the superior BBC miniseries way back in the 80s). Then, the genius idea of killing off Wickham—so deserving of a mysterious death. The list of suspects with grievances is enough to weave an excellent whodunit. Okay, what fun! Let’s keep reading….huh, what? Who is dead? Wait, who was he again? I’m supposed to care about him? Isn’t this section of driving into the forest looking for the body and who is sitting in what room or looking out what window while waiting for the search party to return and then getting the body back and putting the body on the table and laying the pillows and blankets on the sofa and deciding who will sleep where and what servants are doing going on a little too long? Yes it is. Turns out that’s about 85 percent of the entire content of the novel. Maybe a better title should have been Lots of Housekeeping Issues Arise When Death Comes to Pemberley.

For the majority of this novel, we are expected to read and reread and read again the same account of that one evening, which was aptly explained the first time, and was not so many pages back that I really need to keep re-reading it. I am perfectly capable of following along and there is very little chance that I am going to forget the only tiny bit of action that happened in this book to begin with. I am on page 216 and I just read, again, the fact that there was an argument in the carriage, someone leaves the carriage, they were going on to the King’s Arms at Lambton, Wickham was not received at Pemberely ever. Repetitive, repetitive, repetitive. Does PD James and her editor vacation and spend the holidays together? Because there were serious problems with the writing and pace here that were ignored and that might be the biggest mystery about this book. I would really like to know what goes on in those publishing houses when dreck like this shows up but the author is a sacred cow.

Truly flawed as a mystery. Bad storytelling, badly paced. No misdirection, layers of suspects and or motives. Not until the end of the book do we get an info-dump that explains why we read the first two hundred plus pages of repetitive text and the ending is just (view spoiler)[ wrong place wrong time? (hide spoiler)] Sorry about that old bloke!

I won’t even touch on the really really lame heart to heart talk between Darcy and Elizabeth at the end. Just horrible and sad. ["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>...more

A murder mystery by P.D. James that takes place at Jane Austen’s Pemberley is a reading experience not to be missed if you are a fan of these authors. It is clear that James (who claims a lifelong passion for Austen) had great fun playing with the characters from Pride and Prejudice. She even refers to a few choice characters from Austen’s Persuasion in this novel that takes place six years after the marriage of Elizabeth and Darcy. Great literature this is not, and James’ imitation of Austen’sA murder mystery by P.D. James that takes place at Jane Austen’s Pemberley is a reading experience not to be missed if you are a fan of these authors. It is clear that James (who claims a lifelong passion for Austen) had great fun playing with the characters from Pride and Prejudice. She even refers to a few choice characters from Austen’s Persuasion in this novel that takes place six years after the marriage of Elizabeth and Darcy. Great literature this is not, and James’ imitation of Austen’s witty writing style seems to fizzle after the first few chapters. The identity of the murderer kept me guessing until all was revealed by means of a signed confession. This seems like a cop-out solution, but I have decided it would probably be the way Jane Austen would have ended a murder mystery, had she been inclined to write one. For this diehard Austen reader, the happily-ever-after ending is the icing on a cake served at high tea....more

I was encouraged by the entertaining prologue. A recap of the P&P plot was only to be expected, and it was amusing to hear it from the point of view of Meryton society gossips, who suspect Elizabeth was maneuvering to catch Mr. Darcy from the first time she laid eyes on him. I thought the author was getting all of the rehashing out of the way so that she could tell her new story.

Unfortunately, that’s not the case. Throughout the novel, the characters remind themselves and each other of eventI was encouraged by the entertaining prologue. A recap of the P&P plot was only to be expected, and it was amusing to hear it from the point of view of Meryton society gossips, who suspect Elizabeth was maneuvering to catch Mr. Darcy from the first time she laid eyes on him. I thought the author was getting all of the rehashing out of the way so that she could tell her new story.

Unfortunately, that’s not the case. Throughout the novel, the characters remind themselves and each other of events that happened in the original novel. Six years have passed, but the book ends with Darcy apologizing to Elizabeth all over again for separating Bingley and Jane, and for his awful proposal! The author also repeatedly inserts recognizable phrases - Elizabeth has “fine eyes” and people worry about the shades of Pemberly being polluted.

Other than the repetition and rehashing, the writing isn’t bad. But the characters are lifeless, and there is strangely little interaction between Elizabeth and Darcy. The dialog largely consists of monologues. There’s a murder mystery, but nobody tries to solve it; it’s resolved by a series of confessions at the end.

This was very disappointing, considering that James is a respected author. Perhaps my hopes were too high....more

JamieQuite bad, wasn't it? But I'm still glad I read it because of the single line about how Charlotte Lucas manages Mr. Collins: "She consistently congratQuite bad, wasn't it? But I'm still glad I read it because of the single line about how Charlotte Lucas manages Mr. Collins: "She consistently congratulated him on qualities he did not possess in the hope that, flattered by her praise and approval, he would acquire them."...more
Jul 15, 2014 11:08AM

What the hell, P.D. James? She's an excellent writer, I cannot understand why she completely failed to capture any trace of the personalities of Darcy and Elizabeth. I've loved her books in the past, and this was really a big disappointment. The intro chapter is ridiculously long, really is there anybody who doesn't know the story of Pride & Prejudice who is going to be reading this book? And if there was, she could have worked all that info in in a more interesting fashion instead of the trWhat the hell, P.D. James? She's an excellent writer, I cannot understand why she completely failed to capture any trace of the personalities of Darcy and Elizabeth. I've loved her books in the past, and this was really a big disappointment. The intro chapter is ridiculously long, really is there anybody who doesn't know the story of Pride & Prejudice who is going to be reading this book? And if there was, she could have worked all that info in in a more interesting fashion instead of the tremendous info dump. Then she proceeds to make Darcy and Elizabeth's relationship completely joyless and strips them both of any interesting thoughts or actions. ...more

Death Comes to Pemberley...boring, boring, boring, very proper, expository death...

I've never read P.D. James who I understand is both an accomplished mystery writer and also about 900 years old. That was evident given the bizarre lapses in continuity throughout this very, very drawn out, excessively verbose, downright boring novel. At the opening of one chapter we are told that the winds have not yet blown the beautiful red and gold leaves off the trees and not one page later the winds have inDeath Comes to Pemberley...boring, boring, boring, very proper, expository death...

I've never read P.D. James who I understand is both an accomplished mystery writer and also about 900 years old. That was evident given the bizarre lapses in continuity throughout this very, very drawn out, excessively verbose, downright boring novel. At the opening of one chapter we are told that the winds have not yet blown the beautiful red and gold leaves off the trees and not one page later the winds have in fact blown all the leaves off the trees so that its possible to see through the branches etc. blah, blah, blah. Even the lapses are boring.

James gets the language right, but that's about it. There's absolutely no mystery here, nobody solves anything, the Darcy's themselves don't actively participate in anything more interesting then dinner parties and deep conversations wherein they rehash everything that happened in "Pride and Prejudice" over and over and over again.

We don't care about who gets killed, we learn nothing about the investigation, we are forced to sit through an entirely expository trial where we are told what happened by people we don't know or care about and who are in no way actually connected to the Darcy's and then everyone goes home and Darcy spends the last three pages whining about what a bastard he was to Elizabeth in "P&P" and how everything is his fault.

James is obsessed with endless interior monologues thought by Elizabeth and Darcy respectively where they go on and on and on about proper behavior and the family name and how much they adore each other but essentially the entire "mystery" happens around them. They don't participate at all except as peripheral witnesses. I'm sorry but this is just not interesting reading. I'm not asking that they become the Scarecrow and Mrs. King but could they unearth at least one clue? Witness something of importance? Anything?

All the players from the original novel are here and again James gets the period right, it certainly SOUNDS like Austen. But the lovely wit, clever play on words and lightness characteristic of Austen's work is sadly absent. Everyone is so DEPRESSED all the time.

The biggest disappointment here is the lost potential of an clearly gifted author getting a terrific idea and then failing miserably. There are plenty of moments when it seems that things will take off that simply fizzle and die.

Do yourselves a favor, if you want really fun, clever and enjoyable P&P follow ups with a mystery twist try the delightful Carrie Bebris who writes a series of excellent Darcy and Elizabeth mysteries that begin with Pride and Prescience (Or A Truth Universally Acknowledged)....more

I'm not sure why P.D. James, a very talented writer of mysteries decided to take on Pride and Prejudice. I can understand (if not forgive) a lesser writer for trying to ride on Jane Austen's coat tails. Perhaps she was in a playful mood. Maybe she said, "Hey I'm 92, I can do whatever I want." Because of her expertise in writing intelligent mysteries, I definitely held her to a higher standard. I didn't think the whole thing worked. Sure, I was happy to be reunited with Elizabeth and Darcy 6 yearI'm not sure why P.D. James, a very talented writer of mysteries decided to take on Pride and Prejudice. I can understand (if not forgive) a lesser writer for trying to ride on Jane Austen's coat tails. Perhaps she was in a playful mood. Maybe she said, "Hey I'm 92, I can do whatever I want." Because of her expertise in writing intelligent mysteries, I definitely held her to a higher standard. I didn't think the whole thing worked. Sure, I was happy to be reunited with Elizabeth and Darcy 6 years into their marriage. I did think James did a good job of recreating these characters in a believable way. Unfortunately, the story plodded along at an excruciatingly slow pace.

First, there was the murder. Then a recounting of the incidents leading up to the murder by everyone involved. Then there was Colonel Fitzwilliam's retelling of the whole incident the following day. Next there was the inquest, where they go through the story again ! And finally, we get to hear the details one more time at the trial. I was bored to tears.

After this, which took 250 pages, the pacing of the book changed completely. There were plot twists and disclosures, and more plot twists for the next 50 (and final) pages. It felt like James was as bored as I was and decided to try to wrap things up quickly.

I would have to say my biggest problem with the book is that in the final pages James introduces characters from Emma! Harriet Smith, Robert Martin, and the Knightlys ! They end up a playing a role in the whole resolution. I found this to be ridiculous. Oh well. 2 stars....more

It is a truth universally acknowledged that imitations may be the sincerest form of flattery but they rarely live up to the originals. In the case of Death Comes to Pemberly, I suspect that Baroness James enjoyed writing this book consideralby more than I enjoyed reading it.P D James is obviously an Austen fan, and she works very hard to re-create the atmosphere and the style that Austen lovers revere. However, this is supposed to be a mystery, and the leisurely style and florid prose of the earIt is a truth universally acknowledged that imitations may be the sincerest form of flattery but they rarely live up to the originals. In the case of Death Comes to Pemberly, I suspect that Baroness James enjoyed writing this book consideralby more than I enjoyed reading it.P D James is obviously an Austen fan, and she works very hard to re-create the atmosphere and the style that Austen lovers revere. However, this is supposed to be a mystery, and the leisurely style and florid prose of the early nineteenth century do not suit, especially when it is further confounded by so many names of characters that the reader REALLY needs a Cast of Characters list to keep them straight, especially if it has been a few years since reading the earlier exploits of the Bennets and Darcys.I confess I did not finish the book, so I cannot comment on the plot, which was almost non-existent up to the place where I stopped reading. Maybe it would have improved, but after 25% of the book is dull I'll move on to something more promising. Too many books and too little time to bother with the ones I am not enjoying....more

P.D. James is one of the great mystery writers. Her books are psychologically dark and dense, humanely subtle and complex. Long before I started reviewing and writing books, she was the author I had to read each time she published a new book.

Her latest takes a decidedly different direction. Instead of contemporary England, she has set this one at Pemberley estate in 1803, six years after Miss Elizabeth Bennet has married Darcy. That is, P.D. James takes the prose of Jane Austen as her setting.P.D. James is one of the great mystery writers. Her books are psychologically dark and dense, humanely subtle and complex. Long before I started reviewing and writing books, she was the author I had to read each time she published a new book.

Her latest takes a decidedly different direction. Instead of contemporary England, she has set this one at Pemberley estate in 1803, six years after Miss Elizabeth Bennet has married Darcy. That is, P.D. James takes the prose of Jane Austen as her setting.

P.D. James has an excellent ear. When she writes in Austen’s mode, she does so with incredible exactitude. The tone and diction sound as if lifted from the pages of Pride and Prejudice. While I fully recognize the torture I inflicted on teenage boys by requiring them to read Pride and Prejudice when I taught high school English, some of us in the world adore Austen. There is something of a cottage industry of imitators of Austen these days. I’ve avoided most of them for one reason or another, mostly time shortage. But when a master like P.D. James joined the cause, I bit. She didn’t disappoint me.

James goes beyond skillful imitation (which would be challenging enough in and of itself), but the hybrid she creates feels at times like strange bedfellows. Even P.D. James admits in her author’s note that death and murder are not the stuff of Austen. James’s customary darkness never feels to me quite at home with the light if cynical tone that Austen strikes even in her most tragic moments. A Picasso set next to a Vermeer are both still delightful to examine, and the juxtaposition can actually illuminate both. Reading Death Comes to Pemberley was a bit like that, two masters at work, but on separate projects that somehow got jumbled together at the publishers. One minute James has you lost in Austen’s language and worldview. The next she’s bent over a bloody corpse or elaborating on police procedures at the opening of the 19th century—not Austen-like at all. One other smaller note: Of such elaborations on various background topics, there were perhaps too many and they were not organically integrated into the flow of the tale. Austen never needs to go into such exegesis, but we understand her world without difficulty. I think James could have trusted us to do without some of this information.

I enjoyed this book, and I recommend it if you happen to love both P.D. James and Austen, but be aware of the disjuncture you may sometimes languish in. Watching a master at work is engaging, especially when she tries something audacious and remarkable. It doesn’t have to be completely successful to be worth the attempt....more

To be fair, I knew better. When I bought this book, I said to the person with me, "I probably shouldn't buy this. It's probably not going to be any good." So, while I'm not exactly surprised that this book wasn't good, I am a bit surprised by how bad it was. I mean, P.D. James is respected and people speak highly of her books. I expected, at the very least, that the mystery would be interesting and complex. It is not. It's not actually a mystery. For one, it's fairly easy to guess at least approTo be fair, I knew better. When I bought this book, I said to the person with me, "I probably shouldn't buy this. It's probably not going to be any good." So, while I'm not exactly surprised that this book wasn't good, I am a bit surprised by how bad it was. I mean, P.D. James is respected and people speak highly of her books. I expected, at the very least, that the mystery would be interesting and complex. It is not. It's not actually a mystery. For one, it's fairly easy to guess at least approximately what happened very early on (and I'm someone who almost never guesses whodunit). For another, there's no real investigation, no looking for clues, nothing exciting. The story just plods along, taking us from place to place, where eventually all is revealed.

All of this might be forgivable if we saw the Darcy and Elizabeth and other beloved characters of Pride and Prejudice in all their glory. But unfortunately, we do not. There is no spark here, no wit. There is also no subtlety. Everything is told to us, rather than having us infer as Austen did. In an epilogue that I found really upsetting, we get a more detailed explanation of why Darcy acted the way he did in P&P--and it's extremely unnecessary and somewhat insulting if you've read P&P a million times and love it.

Actually, that's what I felt through reading this book--either insulted or bored. Neither of these are the emotions that you want to feel when reading a book. There are review quotes on the book giving it quite high praise, so obviously there is a reader for this book, but it wasn't me....more

My likening and respect of Austen has grown as I have aged. As a pre-teen I wasn't a fan, but as an adult, I enjoy her. Persuasion is my favorite novel, not P&P.

P.D. James loves Austen, this much I know. James knows Austen's works and the criticism of the works.

This book is okay in the sense of workmanship. The Austen fan will like the little details - Elizabeth's analysis of her reason for marrying Darcy, the mention of the Elliots, and so on. The plot is realstic and fits in A2.5, I think.

My likening and respect of Austen has grown as I have aged. As a pre-teen I wasn't a fan, but as an adult, I enjoy her. Persuasion is my favorite novel, not P&P.

P.D. James loves Austen, this much I know. James knows Austen's works and the criticism of the works.

This book is okay in the sense of workmanship. The Austen fan will like the little details - Elizabeth's analysis of her reason for marrying Darcy, the mention of the Elliots, and so on. The plot is realstic and fits in Austen's world.

Yet there is some "spark" missing. It isn't because of the focus on Darcy; women love Darcy and to be honest, how could Elizabeth investigate? No, that's not the problem. The problem isn't the respect that James has for the material. Like Denzel Washington and Jodie Foster, James doesn't know the meaning of slumming it or phoning it in.

Yet there is something missing. The spark. The something. The je ne sais quoi....more

WendyI never got that feeling before, but now I can see that it really is like Cinderella.

But as much as I love/like most Austen works, I absolutely refusI never got that feeling before, but now I can see that it really is like Cinderella.

But as much as I love/like most Austen works, I absolutely refuse to read an 'fan fiction' works like this. I've tried, and they just hit so far below the mark...Mr. Darcy, Vampyre is one example of the worst of it.

It is a truth universally acknowledged that fan fiction is a sad pastiche of greater writing. Is this still true when P.D. James is the fan? The short answer is a yes, but…

In her new crime novel, Death Comes to Pemberley, James creates a murder mystery for Darcy and Elizabeth to play Nick and Nora with. Darcy and Elizabeth have now been married for 6 years, they have an heir and a spare and are in general thriving. That is until sister Lydia shows up hysterical, a search has to be made for WickhIt is a truth universally acknowledged that fan fiction is a sad pastiche of greater writing. Is this still true when P.D. James is the fan? The short answer is a yes, but…

In her new crime novel, Death Comes to Pemberley, James creates a murder mystery for Darcy and Elizabeth to play Nick and Nora with. Darcy and Elizabeth have now been married for 6 years, they have an heir and a spare and are in general thriving. That is until sister Lydia shows up hysterical, a search has to be made for Wickham and when his is found he’s bending over a fresh corpse.

James uses her expert eye for detail, thorough research on life and law in Georgian England and obvious love of Jane Austen to great effect then has fun with it all. James adds bonus Austen references for the sharp-eyed to spot but she also adds her own non-Jane interests to the novel. Unlike life in Austenland, James’ early 1800’s English gentry feel the effects of the Napoleonic wars and other then current events. Darcy who in Pride and Prejudice is a straight out of stock romantic hero becomes a fully fledged, three dimensional character in Death Comes to Pemberley. He gets much more of the story from James than he did from Austen’s pen. Meanwhile at times Elizabeth comes across a tad duller compared to her former sparkling self.

You are not going to read Death Comes to Pemberley to get a mystery the caliber of a James’ Adam Dalgliesh book nor will you read it to discover a new Jane Austen. This novel falls enjoyably enough in between those two high water marks. It gives you the opportunity to spend time with beloved characters, do a little sleuthing and reward yourself for your Austen knowledge...more

P. D. (Phyllis Dorothy) James was the author of twenty books, most of which have been filmed and broadcast on television in the United States and other countries. She spent thirty years in various departments of the British Civil Service, including the Police and Criminal Law Department of Great Britain's Home Office. She served as a magistrate and as a governor of the BBOfficial Facebook fan page

P. D. (Phyllis Dorothy) James was the author of twenty books, most of which have been filmed and broadcast on television in the United States and other countries. She spent thirty years in various departments of the British Civil Service, including the Police and Criminal Law Department of Great Britain's Home Office. She served as a magistrate and as a governor of the BBC. In 2000 she celebrated her eightieth birthday and published her autobiography, Time to Be in Earnest. The recipient of many prizes and honors, she was created Baroness James of Holland Park in 1991. She lived in London and Oxford.